Intel is big but don't forget they are largely controlled by bean
counters. Look at Intel's efforts over the years as to their IGP's.
They've never been able to get it right because they really don't care
that much like IBM pushing OS/2 Warp and then throwing in the towel when
Microsoft came out with Windows 95 and the 32 bit API's. Intel is just
playing around like they have been with Larrabee. Bean counters are
stoopid. LOL
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 09:16:29 -0500, Anthony Q. Martin
<[email protected]> wrote:
If what you're saying is true (or turns out to be true), then I would
agree with Stan...it's a gimmick. If a tech is not useful enough to
have wide adoption, then what is the point of it? Why would apple
bother? Why would Intel bother? Of course, with HDDs so cheap, moving
data @ 600-800 GB/s to a NAS is a useful thing. Also, I would think
Intel is big enough to push both USB3 and Lightpeak.
On 3/21/2011 10:00 AM, [email protected] wrote:
The problem in that regard though is that lightpeak is fast... Just not
fast enough for one of the core concepts. It doesn't have enough
bandwidth for full flow displayport, and would be wiped out by
uncompressed hdmi.
So, since its a hub and spoje methhod, you'd wipe it out in one
device. Its support for data and relaying other standards over it is
fantastic. But I think the adoption rate is going to be low. The
problem is, some look at it as 'the standard to rule all standards' but
native devices will be few and far between. Its hard to be a lightpeak
native device when your market consists of 3 total macbooks for the
next nine months. That's why even devices like iPad2 don't have a
lightpeak data connector.
Since Lightpeak is the equivelent of 8 pci-e lanes, people aren't
throwing cards into pcs to grab it, as boards with integrated video
won't have enough pci-e lanes to do it, and boards without will be
using the x16 slot for video.
Lightpeak is a very cool future standard. But the negative is that it
has slowed up intel from pushing out usb3 boards, and it will be a
while before it matters to end users.
If Lightpeak is going to work, intel needs much broader adoption then
it has in its cards right now. No one knows how or if that will
happen, or if this ends up a cool standard with low adoption rates like
firewire.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Zottl<[email protected]>
Sender: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 09:53:04
To:<[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H] Intel Thunderbolt (aka Light Peak)
What I think has been funny is that you all are arguing about interfaces
that were developed from the same company for different reasons:
USB History: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Serial_Bus
Lightpeak History: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightpeak
USB is great for slower devices, like mice/keyboard/printers and was
even
adopted to hard drives because it was fast enough for it. It was meant
to
simplify cabling and confusion by Joe Consumer. Lightpeak (I think
Thunderbolt is a retarded name) is meant for much higher speed things,
like
external video cards, SSD's, etc. where direct interactions of memory
are
involved. The switch to copper was not a huge surprise: Have you seen
how
people throw wires in their bags? Fiber would never hold up to the
abuse
that most people give copper. It also makes sense since they can now
provide power over the copper and it is cheaper for people to buy
(copper<<fiber). This will (hopefully to Intel) lead to it's wider
adoption. Apple loves new shiny things, so of course they jumped on the
bandwagon :)
Sabre
----
Julian
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 8:26 AM, Anthony Q.
Martin<[email protected]>wrote:
How many apple products does one need to be a fanboy? I have products
Intel, AMD, Apple, MS, LG, ASUS, Logitech, Gigabyte, Silverstone,
Coolermaster, Corsair, Epson, HP, Samsung, Hannspree, Viewsonic,
Panasonic,
Seagate, Western Digital, Canon, Sony, kodak, HTC, Barnes&Noble, etc
in here
right now. Even a Dell laptop. I'm sure I could name some more, but my
finger tips are hurting now.
I am digging on my iPad 2, though. I love reading National Geographic
on-the-go on this thing!
On 3/21/2011 6:30 AM, Stan Zaske wrote:
Maybe I was too harsh by calling it a gimmick. I also said that it had
great promise for the future and that Intel caught everybody off
guard by
changing their minds about using copper instead of fiber. It has very
limited usage at the moment and is exclusive to Apple products only.
What
part of that did you Apple fanboys not understand? LOL
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 20:29:23 -0500, Greg Sevart<[email protected]>
wrote:
That's the exact trend I was about to comment on. If this was AMD's
technology, it'd be the greatest thing since the scroll wheel. It
gets
old.
By the way, I hate the name Thunderbolt.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware-
[email protected]] On Behalf Of Anthony Q. Martin
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2011 8:14 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H] Intel Thunderbolt (aka Light Peak)
So, by your definition, any new tech is a gimmick. I guess you hate
on
everyone except amd these days, huh?
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 19, 2011, at 9:05 PM, "Stan Zaske"<[email protected]> wrote:
It is a gimmick. You don't think I know it's now included into
Applesauce
products? Really? Good first effort by Intel and Job's Mob. LOL Oh
yeah,
Intel
changed their minds and based it on copper instead of fiber. The
company
any intelligent person loves to despise more than Intel itself. LOL
Or
is
that
Microsoft?
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 09:30:09 -0500, Anthony Q. Martin
<[email protected]> wrote:
A gimmick? It's now included on some Apple laptops. Why are new
things
considered gimmicks? Seems unfair to me, as that word mostly has a
negative connotation.
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 19, 2011, at 9:53 AM, "Stan Zaske"<[email protected]>
wrote:
It's just a gimmick at the present with great promise for the
future.
Imagine having that kind of speed with future SSD's capable of
utilizing
it. This
is precisely the reason Intel has been very slow to adopt USB 3 in
their
chipsets. They want to bypass and supplant USB 3 entirely.
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:28:53 -0500, Bino Gopal
<[email protected]> wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)
So I've read the Wikipedia article but I'm still not sure I get
*how*
this is
going to change things exactly...is this basically only a faster
means
of
transferring data from external devices (like HDDs)? Is that all
or are
there
more use cases I'm not thinking of?
And how do people feel this will compare to USB 3.0? Since I
have
neither of them, it's an interesting question of which I'd rather
have/use
going forward...thoughts? I know some people are saying HDD speeds
will
be the bottleneck now, not the bus, so if so, what would be the
advantage
of
one over the other in practical, everyday terms?
BINO
P.S. And is it just me, or was the time to market for this
*really*
fast
compared to other new tech that gets announced and seems to take
forever
before we see it in implementation??
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client:
http://www.opera.com/mail/
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client:
http://www.opera.com/mail/
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
